|
★ 小木虫: 金币+0.5, 给个红包,谢谢回帖
被拒的:
Reviewer: 1
>
>Recommendation: Publish elsewhere.
>
>Comments:
>This paper describes the formation of Au-Ag bimetallic nanorods using decahedral Au nanocrystals as the templates. A variety of such bimetallic nanorods have been synthesized. Even though some of these heterostructures have been reported before, this work adds more variety to the products formed. From reading the experimental procedure, it is unclear if the gold seeds contain a silver coating. The experimental section is not well-written and is somewhat confusing. It is not clear the volumes of AgNO3 used for all the samples. Additional comments are given below.
>1. Please check Tsuji’s work on growth of the bimetallic heterostructures. His papers should be cited.
>2. Ref. 3: One author name is incorrectly spelled. Ref. 5: Authors should be corrected to “Chen, Y.-H.; Hung, H.-H.; Huang, M. H.” Journal abbreviation should be used for Coordination Chemistry Reviews. Change Angew. Chem. to Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Ref. 10a: 48 should not be in bold text. Ref. 10-13: No dot after the reference number. These examples show that the reference section should be checked again carefully.
>3. Please rewrite the following sentence: “However, most reports of heterogeneous growth are noble metal and other nonnoble substances …” This sentence is not so easy to understand.
>4. Check spelling for PVP. Change decahedrons to decahedra. What was the oil heating temperature in the preparation of the gold seed particles? No need to write “this method is not published”.
>5. Experimental Section: There should be a space between a number and its unit.
>6. The description for making nanobottles is not clear. State volume and concentration of HAuCl4 solution used.
>7. For making nanonails, state 70 microliters of propane diamine was added.
>8. Why AgNO3 was added in the synthesis of Au decahedra and nanorods? Has silver incorporated into the resulting Au particles? Any EDS data to support the composition of the resulting Au particles?
>9. Figure 4B: “far to Au tip” is incorrect. It can be changed to “at the other end of the nanorod”. Fix the same problem in Figure S1.
>10. Figure S17: When NH3 is added, Ag(NH3)2+ should form, so the solution becomes clear. See, for example, J. Phys. Chem. C 2011, 115, 17768, for relevant discussion. This role of NH3 should be discussed, instead of saying that it acts as a reducing ability modifier.
>11. Since amounts of AgNO3 added for making the bimetallic nanorods of different lengths are different, how do we know it is the growth rate causing the one-side or two-side growth? What is the evidence of slower or faster rate of growth, except by comparing the lengths of the nanorod products?
>12. There is no evidence to suggest preferential adsorption of PDDA on {110} and {100} facets. It is the decahedra which serve as templates to guide the formation of penta-twinned nanorod structure. Please remove this statement.
>13. How come the figures in the Supporting Information are not arranged according to the order they are discussed in the main text? For example, S17 is discussed before S9 and S11.
>
>In summary, this paper only presents the synthetic results but lack a deeper investigation of the growth rate and ammonia effect. There are also extensive corrections to make. This paper is not recommended for publication in JACS in its present form.
>
>
>Additional Questions:
>Significance: Moderate (not suitable for JACS)
>
>Novelty: High (suitable for JACS)
>
>Broad interest: High (suitable for JACS)
>
>Scholarly presentation: Moderate (not suitable for JACS)
>
>Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: In Part
>
>Are the literature references appropriate and correct?: In Part
>
>
>Reviewer: 2
>
>Recommendation: Publish in JACS after minor revisions.
>
>Comments:
>The authors studied an asymmetric growth of heterometallic nanorods by precise control of growth kinetics. Their results are excellent, which provide good information to induce asymmetry from the symmetric morphology. This manuscript is suitable for the publication after the adjustment of subtle things.
>
>1) In the synthesis, Figure 2 is better to be located in Supporting Information, because the structures were already reported in other literatures, and not brand-new. The authors claimed that the synthesis of decahedrons was an unpublished result, but the synthetic procedure must be clear for giving enough information to the others. Therefore, the synthetic conditions of the seeds and the products should be written in detail (in Supporting Information). What is the reaction temperature for the decahedron synthesis? Did'n the researcher add more Ag precursor solutions into the reaction mixture for bimetallic Ag-Au growth? Please write clearly and in detail for the synthetic procedures.
>
>2) In the left column of page 2, line 48-52, the authors described selective absorption of PDDA on {110} and {100}, favoring the longitudinal growth. However, PDDA also has a significant role in the synthesis of Au decahedral seeds, which have only {111} surfaces. Apparently, PDDA seems to stabilize {111} as well as {100} and {110}, but its preference may be altered by the different reaction conditions. Can the authors clearly describe this aspect in the manuscript? Perhaps it needs some additional experiments.
>
>Additional Questions:
>Significance: Highest (top 5%, suitable for JACS)
>
>Novelty: Highest (top 5%, suitable for JACS)
>
>Broad interest: Highest (top 5%, suitable for JACS)
>
>Scholarly presentation: High (suitable for JACS)
>
>Are the conclusions adequately supported by the data?: In Part
>
>Are the literature references appropriate and correct?: Yes |
|